Being a nervous wreck on Friday evening i took it upon myself to rewatch the 2008 Grand Final, (mainly to remind myself that we were more than capable of beating St Helens and give myself a slap in the face and calm down).
In my opinion Bluey got the tactics spot on last year so much so that before last nights game i said to my sister that i thought we would sit back for the first half hour and let them batter against us. This in turn would lead them into a false sense of security and then we could turn them round and take them apart.
As long as we were no more than 2 scores down i thought we would see it through.
Sure enough St Helens came at us from the off but apart from the lucky deflection leading to Eastmonds try didn't trouble the try line much at all. (I thought we seemed very comfortable defending and kicking on the 4th fitted in well with this).
Shortly before the half hour mark Ali came on and this seemed to be the signal for Leeds to begin their attack. Sure enough on 30 mins we went in for Disko's try.
Unfortunately with Ali going off 5 minutes later it seemed to throw our plans out a bit.
Obviously we persevered and went on to win and we showed great mental strength to do that.
However after reading this and Saints forum all day it seems that the consensus of opinion is that they were totally dominant for those first 30 mins and even that they should have demolished us.
Is it not a case that we aimed to defend knowing full well that we could and would turn it round later on in the game much like last year? We certainly seemed comfortable enough when defending to me.
Apologies for the long winded post but i tend to ramble
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/df977/df977823b34ec80ba4876c85a37190aa5d8ae24b" alt="Smile icon_smile.gif"